Wikileak's sex flounders charges leaked.

Freiwillige · 02-04-11, 01:41 PM

Oh the Irony. But after reading the charges I had to LOL. Are Swede's that up tight? The charges are laughable and would hardly constitute rape in my opinion.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110204/...ileaks_assange

frau kaleun · 02-04-11, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freiwillige

and would hardly constitute rape in my opinion.

Where the law defines rape as "sex without consent," initiating sexual intercourse with a partner who is unconscious and therefore cannot have consented to it is rape, the end.

Catfish · 02-04-11, 01:46 PM

They need a reason to accuse him. Any reason.
The oldest rule, "destroy a man publicly, before you kill him".

Imagine how many people now think that Assange is a criminal, even if he is set free this will always haunt him.

Greetings,
Catfish

Dowly · 02-04-11, 01:53 PM

So, the woman let him continue the act in BOTH occasions and is now screaming RAPE RAPE?

Rrrright...

tater · 02-04-11, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freiwillige

The charges are laughable and would hardly constitute rape in my opinion

Wow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by frau kaleun

Where the law defines rape as "sex without consent," initiating sexual intercourse with a partner who is unconscious and therefore cannot have consented to it is rape, the end.

This.

Note that even if the woman consented AFTER the act started, the act of starting without consent was in itself rape. Intent matters.

Freiwillige · 02-04-11, 03:18 PM

Now do not misunderstand me, Rape is a horrific crime that should be punished to the fullest extent of the law and then some. The Issue as I understand isn't one of consensual sex but over the issue of the usage of a condom.

So before I get hung on my statement one needs to understand that one judge already threw it out only to have it reinstated by another.

It was clear by her statement that she wasn't offended they were having intercourse but was offended that he did not use a condom the second time.

She allowed the intercourse to continue with the statement "You batter not have aids".........So STD concern is the context of the issue not sexual intercourse. That is how I read into it and just my opinion.

gimpy117 · 02-04-11, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dowly

So, the woman let him continue the act in BOTH occasions and is now screaming RAPE RAPE?

Rrrright...

It happens a lot actually...but I think it's extra suspicious in this case..especially when it was thrown out but re-instated by somebody up the ladder.

but then again, you piss off world governments and this sort of thing happens to you.

tater · 02-04-11, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freiwillige

Now do not misunderstand me, Rape is a horrific crime that should be punished to the fullest extent of the law and then some. The Issue as I understand isn't one of consensual sex but over the issue of the usage of a condom.

So before I get hung on my statement one needs to understand that one judge already threw it out only to have it reinstated by another.

It was clear by her statement that she wasn't offended they were having intercourse but was offended that he did not use a condom the second time.

She allowed the intercourse to continue with the statement "You batter not have aids".........So STD concern is the context of the issue not sexual intercourse. That is how I read into it and just my opinion.

My bad, I read frau's reply, but not the OP link.

You're right.

Takeda Shingen · 02-04-11, 04:02 PM

When you scan the thread titles quickly, this appears to read 'Wikileaks founders sex changes leaked'.

tater · 02-04-11, 04:07 PM

I winder why we don't just bump him off. Even the Obama Admin for all their talk before his election have shown they are willing to kill people with no due process (that's what using a drone attack on a "high value target" is, after all.

If you can bump off some AQ guy who might not actually kill people, but instead, um, manages the AQ website and propaganda, then why not Assange?

What's the difference?

02-04-11, 04:07 PM

Quote:

this appears to read 'Wikileaks founders sex changes leaked.

That is the real story, he released the cables to publicise his book to raise money for the operation.
He is trying to delay the extradition until the op and then get it thrown out by claiming he is now Julie-ann.

August · 02-04-11, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catfish

They need a reason to accuse him. Any reason.
The oldest rule, "destroy a man publicly, before you kill him".

Imagine how many people now think that Assange is a criminal, even if he is set free this will always haunt him.

Greetings,
Catfish

I thought he was a criminal before these allegations surfaced.

Skybird · 02-04-11, 05:03 PM

Haven'T we been here before, in a thread some weeks ago aboiut Assange'S sex charges? There I pointed out that the laws in Sweden are such that a woman that is not feeling well after intercourse (or at least claims that), can sue her partner for rape. As a male you can get into trouble just because the woman makes up her mind - afterwards.

I think they are nuts up there.

Edit:
P.S. Here it is. I knew I already had put it on the table:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...&postcount=186
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...&postcount=274

Platapus · 02-04-11, 05:59 PM

Having sex with a woman who is unconscious is pretty creepy in any context.

Excuse me, I feel the need to wash my hands after reading about this guy. ewww

What a creapazoid.

Dunno about Swedish law, but from the international "guy law" this guy sounds like a loser.

Porking women when they are unconscious is totally lame.

Catfish · 02-04-11, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

I thought he was a criminal before these allegations surfaced.

No he was not, but see how this stuff already works ?
Sun Tzu at its finest

Greetings,
Catfish

P.S. If you probably mean that he is a criminal for making the stuff public in this wikileaks, i guess all witnesses of concentration camps spreading the word should also have been silenced ? Well, it has been tried

02-04-11, 01:41 PM	#1
Freiwillige The Old Man Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Phx. Az Posts: 1,458 Downloads: 24 Uploads: 0	Wikileak's sex flounders charges leaked. Oh the Irony. But after reading the charges I had to LOL. Are Swede's that up tight? The charges are laughable and would hardly constitute rape in my opinion. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110204/...ileaks_assange

02-04-11, 05:03 PM	#13
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,602 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Haven'T we been here before, in a thread some weeks ago aboiut Assange'S sex charges? There I pointed out that the laws in Sweden are such that a woman that is not feeling well after intercourse (or at least claims that), can sue her partner for rape. As a male you can get into trouble just because the woman makes up her mind - afterwards. I think they are nuts up there. Edit: P.S. Here it is. I knew I already had put it on the table: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...&postcount=186 http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...&postcount=274 __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert. Last edited by Skybird; 02-04-11 at 05:19 PM.

02-04-11, 05:59 PM	#14
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,360 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	Having sex with a woman who is unconscious is pretty creepy in any context. Excuse me, I feel the need to wash my hands after reading about this guy. ewww What a creapazoid. Dunno about Swedish law, but from the international "guy law" this guy sounds like a loser. Porking women when they are unconscious is totally lame. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

02-04-11, 01:46 PM	#3
Catfish Dipped Squirrel Operative Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky Posts: 17,765 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	They need a reason to accuse him. Any reason. The oldest rule, "destroy a man publicly, before you kill him". Imagine how many people now think that Assange is a criminal, even if he is set free this will always haunt him. Greetings, Catfish

02-04-11, 01:53 PM	#4
Dowly Lucky Jack Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Finland Posts: 25,052 Downloads: 32 Uploads: 0	So, the woman let him continue the act in BOTH occasions and is now screaming RAPE RAPE? Rrrright...

02-04-11, 03:18 PM	#6
Freiwillige The Old Man Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Phx. Az Posts: 1,458 Downloads: 24 Uploads: 0	Now do not misunderstand me, Rape is a horrific crime that should be punished to the fullest extent of the law and then some. The Issue as I understand isn't one of consensual sex but over the issue of the usage of a condom. So before I get hung on my statement one needs to understand that one judge already threw it out only to have it reinstated by another. It was clear by her statement that she wasn't offended they were having intercourse but was offended that he did not use a condom the second time. She allowed the intercourse to continue with the statement "You batter not have aids".........So STD concern is the context of the issue not sexual intercourse. That is how I read into it and just my opinion.

02-04-11, 04:02 PM	#9
Takeda Shingen Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2000 Posts: 8,643 Downloads: 19 Uploads: 0	When you scan the thread titles quickly, this appears to read 'Wikileaks founders sex changes leaked'.

02-04-11, 04:07 PM	#10
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	I winder why we don't just bump him off. Even the Obama Admin for all their talk before his election have shown they are willing to kill people with no due process (that's what using a drone attack on a "high value target" is, after all. If you can bump off some AQ guy who might not actually kill people, but instead, um, manages the AQ website and propaganda, then why not Assange? What's the difference?